But, beyond this, when translations were made into Syriac and Latin (the former certainly, the later probably, as early as the middle of the second century), the attention of scholars was necessarily directed to the difficulties in interpretation of the text, with its occasional archaic ex- pressions, obscure words, and harsh constructions ; and the practical usefulness of a simplified and modernised text was thus suggested. Tatian's Harmony of the Four Gospels, and Marcion's doctored editions, show how at- tempts were made from different points of view and in different ways to adapt the sacred narrative for popular use : Tatian changed the order, Marcion altered the text by excision or worse. Thus the plan of a simplified text was quite in keeping with the custom of the second century ; and the Bezan Text seems to be of that kind. As a whole it is not Lukan : it has a fatal smoothness, it loses the rather harsh but very individual style of Luke, and it neglects some of the literary forms that Luke observed. But it has a high value for several reasons: {i) it preserves with corruptions a second-century witness to the text, and often gives valuable, and sometimes
26 The Acts of the Apostles. Chap. I.
conclusive, evidence of readings ; (2) it shows what view was held as to the meaning of various passages in the second century ; (3) it adds several pieces of information which probably rest on good evidence, though they were not written by Luke. Thus we can often gather from the Bezan comment what was the original reading commented on; and it vindicates the great MSS. in XVI 12 against Dr. Hort's conjecture. It reveals to us the first beginnings of Pauline legend (p. 106); and in this respect it stands on much the same level as the original text of the Acta of Paul and Thekla, where also it is hard to distinguish where history ends and romance begins. With the help of these two authorities, combined with early Christian inscriptions (which begin only about 190, but give retro- spective evidence), we can recover some faint idea of the intellectual life of the second-century Christians in Asia Minor and North Syria.
The Bezan Text will, indubitably, afford much study and some discoveries in the future. Its explanatory simplifica- tions often show the influence of the translations which first suggested the idea of a simplified text. When the need for an explanation arose in connection with a render- ing in Latin, or in Syriac, the simplification took a Latin or Syriac colour; but this was consciously adopted as a simplification, and not through mere blundering.
While the Bezan Text has gone furthest from the original Lukan Text, there is no MS. which has not suffered seriously from the various causes of depravation. Several of the errors that have affected the two great MSS. look like changes made intentionally in order to suit a mistaken idea of the meaning of other passages ; but there is always a possibility that in these cases an
Sec 5. The Text of Acts, 27
editor was making a choice between varieties of reading that had been produced unintentionally. Only in the Bezan Text can we confidently say that deliberate alterations were made in the text.
I believe that the Bezan Reviser made many skilful changes in passages relating to Asia Minor and some foolish changes in European passages. In some of these cases, the view remains open that the Bezan reading is the original ; but evidence is as yet not sufficient to give certainty. The home of the Revision is along the line of intercourse between Syrian Antioch and Ephesus, for the life of the early Church lay in intercommunication, but the Reviser was connected with Antioch, for he inserts "we" in XI 28.
Note, rbv irp&Tov \6yov. The commentators univer- sally regard this as an example of the misuse of 7rpu)To<s ; but they give no sufficient proof that Luke elsewhere misused that word. In Stephen's speech (VII 12) the adverb irpwrov misused for trporepov occurs, but a dis- passionate consideration of the speeches in Acts must convince every reader that they are not composed by the author, but taken verbatim from other authorities (in this case from Philip at Csesareia, XXI 8). Blass, p. 16, points out with his usual power, that the character and distinction of the comparative and superlative degrees was decaying in the Greek of the N.T., and that in many adjectives one of the two degrees played the part of both. But such changes do not affect all words simultaneously ; and the distinction between irpoTepo? and 7rpwTo<? might be expected to last longer than that between most other pairs. We observe that Paul uses both, and